ArticlePloS one2024
Cost-effectiveness of an oral cholate challenge test for the management of patients at risk for large esophageal varices.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence Supporting Utility of the Oral Cholate Challenge Test of Liver Function and Physiology to Aid Clinical Management: A Review of Analytical and Clinical Validation Studies.Gastro hep advances · 2026Review
- When should I repeat the endoscopy in my patient with compensated cirrhosis, whom I just scoped and who had no or small varices?Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Cholate Shunt, Oral Cholate Challenge and Endoscopic Lesions of Portal Hypertension: The SHUNT-V Study.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe dual oral cholate challenge test (DuO) quantifies liver function and portal-systemic shunting. Herein we report the economic impact of the use of the DuO Disease Severity Index (DSI) in the clinical management of patients with chronic liver disease suspected of having large esophageal varices.
methodsA Markov health state transition model of 100,000 patients with chronic liver disease suspected of having varices was populated with previously reported epidemiological, utility, and price data to assess the cost-effectiveness of employing the DuO test against the standard of care. The model examined the clinical and economic impact of healthcare management decisions all centered around the DSI score and given fixed prices of the DuO test.
resultsIn the target population, the combined strategy of healthcare management decisions based on DSI results would be highly cost-effective within two years for a price of $3,250 per DuO test. These same management decisions would save 2,740 lives over five years. For a price of ≤$3,213 per test, this intervention would be cost-saving within two years, and for ≤$4,100 per test it would be cost-saving within five years.
conclusionsClinical decisions based on DSI from DuO are cost-effective in the management of patients with chronic liver disease suspected of having large esophageal varices. Future studies of direct comparison of DuO with other noninvasive tests are warranted. The DuO test offers a simplified approach that could enhance the clinical and research utility of liver function testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.